I just read the most rank review of the Titanic. To find it: ( reference *: means to click on) Go to the Yahoo search engine, * News/Weather, then * Entertainment, @ the left column under Full Coverage * more..., * Titanic,( A really cool source for current Titanic info) and under the Reviews : * Salon:Glub,Glub,Glub. ( or here is the address: http://www.salonmagazine.com/ent/movies/1997/12/cov_17titanic.htm) Man, I can't believe how mean-spirited this "Stephanie Zacherek" is. She obviously went in with a preconcieved disgust for anything that J. Cameron does. I have great respect for what Ballard has done, but her comparison and perception of what Cameron has done is, in my opinion, WAY out of line. I think she had made up her mind to hate the movie before she even saw it. The review is dated 12-17-97, so I wonder if she has backtracked on her position, like alot of the reviewers have done, since it's become so successful. I'm all for everyone having their own views on subjects, but Jeez-Louise!!!! have a little class!!! I really don't understand her kind of venom. I hate to say this, but what a turd-head she seems to be. I wonder if there is anything she has a positive opinion about? If you check the archives of this on-line mag, and look up her reviews on various movies, I guess not. I suppose it only toots her horn to even mention her name, and even though I have read some negative views on this movie, I have to say I was shocked at the depth black-heartedness of her review. Their E-mail address is : Salon@salonmagazine.com (Simply Unbelievable!!!!!)

-- SRH (Shrenay@hotmail.com), March 19, 1998

Answers

I think there's something wrong with all the reviewers in that magazine. They all seem to have negative reviews. That Stephanie lady is crazy! Somebody should put her in a mental institution or something. What a sour face! She's probably lacking all the love Jack and Rose feel for each other in her own life, so she's taking it out on her awful review. She's probably a sour, old, ugly woman who has nobody to love her or cares about her. It's obvious that she was totally against Titanic from the first moment she heard about it. She is complaining because Titanic is supposedly not historical enough. James Cameron himself said that it was "first and foremost a love story". She says that you feel nothing for the ship or the people that died on it when you see the movie, and she is totally wrong. She doesn't care a thing for Jack and Rose. This lady must not have a heart. James Cameron did the best he could to make the film historically acurate, he even had experts there. This lady is a wacko! She should be banned from writing reviews. I saw part of the review she wrote for The Man in the Iron Mask and she said even teenagers would think it was awful. This is a really dumb lady. I wonder what her idea of a good movie is!

-- Jennifer (foo@bar.com), March 19, 1998.

Thank you Jennifer! If anyone know of way I can contact her, it would be great. I live in Boston too and would be great to meet her face to face!!

-- Rose (rose364@earthlink.net), March 19, 1998.

Critics thrive on controversy, or so it seems, so I wouldn't get too worked up over it. As far as the film being historically accurate, in my opinion, it can't get much more accurate than it was (of course, with the storyline an exception, as it was meant to be.). I have always respected and enjoyed Gene Shallit (sp?) as a film critic up until recently, and most recently this morning. But, his opinion of the film is just that: his opinion, and we all know what opinions are like! Just MY opinion!

Regards, Peter

-- Peter Nivling (pcnivling@capecod.net), March 20, 1998.

yeah, read that piece of driveling nonsense. She sounds like a bitch! Just a Cassandra, calling vainly into the wind-redundant, pointless and stupid. I wouldn't waste even E-mail.

-- R. Murdoch (foo@bar.com), March 20, 1998.